Everything the agent has been asked to import, and what it decided.
| Source | Reviews | State | Received | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dr. Eleanor Marsh ACADEMIC kcl.ac.uk/history/staff/marsh/wikicritic/acupuncture REVIEWLicence line found. Credentials confirmed against the institutional page; weighted as Expert. | Acupuncture | IMPORTED | 14 Jun 08:12 | |
| James Rawlins SUBSTACK neutralpov.substack.com/p/what-wikipedia-wont-say-about-acupuncture REVIEWImported. Contributor class General public — journalist, no confirmed subject-matter credential. | Acupuncture | IMPORTED | 11 Jun 19:40 | |
| Peter Schiff X x.com/PeterSchiff/status/1799… SUBJECT RESPONSERead via publish.x.com/oembed. Author is the article subject — pinned first on a BLP page. | Peter Schiff | IMPORTED | 02 Jul 15:55 | |
| Jacob G. Hornberger BLOG fff.org/2026/06/deleted-from-wikipedia-a-reply PAGE SUPPRESSIONREBUTTALArticle does not exist — deleted at AfD and creation-protected. No rubric run; status shown instead. | Jacob G. Hornberger | IMPORTED | 21 Jun 10:02 | |
| unknown BLOG quietcorner.example.org/2026/07/six-wikipedia-articles-that-need-work Refused — reviews six articles. One comment reviews one article. The author was told to split it and re-submit; the reason is at the claim-token URL. Checked before extraction, so nothing was spent. | six candidates | REFUSED | 19 Jul 22:31 | |
| unknown GOOGLE DOC docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vNb4Hs8k…/pub Refused — no licence line. Fetched fine (200 OK). The post never says "This comment is CC-by-sa licensed for #WikiCritic use", so there is no permission to import it. No LLM spend: the licence check runs before extraction. | — | REFUSED | 17 Jul 13:07 | |
Anon BLOG
example.net/notes/wikipedians-i-have-known
Refused — target is a user page. Page: named
a Wikipedian, not an article. We do not review Wikipedians yet; the reason says so rather than failing
silently. |
user page | REFUSED | 16 Jul 09:44 | |
| unknown ACADEMIC journals.example.edu/articles/2026/wikipedia-and-medical-consensus Login wall. 200 OK, but the body is a sign-in page rather than the article. Classified as a fetch refusal, not a network error — we cannot tell whether this is licensed, only that we are not allowed to look. | — | CANNOT FETCH | 15 Jul 17:55 | |
| unknown X x.com/somereviewer/status/1802… (thread of 14) Thread, not a single post. We can read one post, not a thread. The author was asked to cross-post the full text somewhere we can fetch it, and submit that URL. | — | CANNOT FETCH | 14 Jul 11:26 | |
| Counsel for a named editor EMAIL submitted via takedown contact · ref LC-2026-0714 Routed to a human — legal communication. A demand to remove a Talkback naming an editor's conduct. Not a comment; the agent must not adjudicate it. See Legal communications routing. | Peter Schiff | NEEDS A HUMAN | 14 Jul 08:03 | |
| D. Whitfield, RN GOOGLE DOC docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vLm2Fp7q…/pub Possible same author as an existing comment. Byline, cross-links and writing style suggest this is the author of an imported comment under a different handle. Duplicate and same-person detection flags; a person decides. | Acupuncture | NEEDS A HUMAN | 13 Jul 20:18 | |
| unknown BLOG writingmachine.example.com/wikipedia-audit-no-41 Possibly machine-written. Forty-one near-identical "audits" from one address in a week, none showing knowledge that required reading the article. Flagged, not rejected — detection is unreliable and our own formatting advice leaves model fingerprints on honest writing. | — | NEEDS A HUMAN | 12 Jul 06:50 |
Refusals are not failures to hide: each one keeps its reason, and the submitter can read it at their claim-token URL. The licence check and the one-article check both run before any paid work, so most refusals cost nothing. Queue and run assessments on the Assessments tab.